John was the last to write a Gospel, and his is the most theological of the four. The other three are very similar in their content, enough so that they're considered the Synoptic Gospels (from the Greek word sunoptikos, meaning summary). John, who wrote his Gospel much later than the others, was writing for a general Christian audience. He presumed that people had already heard the other Gospels, and wrote a more in-depth, advanced version of Jesus's life and words. As a metaphor, if Matthew, Mark, and Luke's Gospels were college 101 textbooks, John's is a 500-level course.
John set the tone by starting his Gospel off with a philosophical concept of pre-existence: Before Jesus was conceived by Mary, he existed from all eternity in his divinity as the second person of the Holy Trinity. The first line of the Gospel According to John is: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." This is a very theological concept. John wished his audience to see Jesus as actually being the Word of God. He then continues: "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us." He was saying that Jesus was the incarnate word, that is, the Word of God actually becoming a physical man.
If the phrase "In the beginning" sounds familiar, it's also the first line of the Book of Genesis. According to Genesis 1:3, God said "Let there be light and there was light." In other words, God created by simply speaking the Word. John built on this in his Gospel by saying Jesus was the Word. The Word of God wasn't a thing, but an actual person. Just as God said the word and light was created, so too was Jesus able to cure the sick and dead by simply speaking.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
The Gospel According to Mark
Mark is the shortest of the four Gospels, due to his audience being mostly Roman. When one is preaching to an imperial police state, one is not concerned about making connections to a Hebrew past, nor does one make lengthy philosophical points. Romans wanted action. This is why the Gospel According to Mark has fewer sermons and more movement. It's a continuous narrative about Jesus's ministry, which would have appealed better to the Romans than any of the other Gospels.
Mark explicitly worked Romans into his Gospel, as well. At Jesus's crucifixion, Mark wrote of a Roman centurion (a commander of 100 soldiers) who proclaimed, "Truly, this was the Son of God" (Mk 15:39). Mark's Roman audience would have definitely perked up when they heard this part of the story, since it was an act of faith by one of their own.
Much like Luke, Mark wasn't one of the 12 apostles. Instead, the two were among the first 72 disciples. The apostles were there to witness Jesus's words and deeds, but disciples learned about it secondhand, told by other sources. Luke is believed to have received much of his information from Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Mark from his friend Peter, the chief apostle.
Mark explicitly worked Romans into his Gospel, as well. At Jesus's crucifixion, Mark wrote of a Roman centurion (a commander of 100 soldiers) who proclaimed, "Truly, this was the Son of God" (Mk 15:39). Mark's Roman audience would have definitely perked up when they heard this part of the story, since it was an act of faith by one of their own.
Much like Luke, Mark wasn't one of the 12 apostles. Instead, the two were among the first 72 disciples. The apostles were there to witness Jesus's words and deeds, but disciples learned about it secondhand, told by other sources. Luke is believed to have received much of his information from Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Mark from his friend Peter, the chief apostle.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Comparing Gospels: Matthew & Luke
The Catholic Church views the entire Bible as the inspired and error-free work of God and the Gospels as especially so, since they chronicle Jesus's time on Earth. As we've stated numerous times in earlier posts, the Church believes the Bible is sacred literature, and should be interpreted literally in some parts and figuratively in others. Since they are a narrative, the Gospels are primarily interpreted literally.
Matthew opens his Gospel with a long genealogy of Jesus, starting with Abraham and ending with Joseph, Mary's husband and the human "father" of Jesus. Matthew was likely addressing converts from Judaism, linking Jesus back to the legendary founder of their religion.
Luke offers a similar genealogy, but not until Chapter 3, and he starts with Jesus and works all the way back to Adam. Luke was a Gentile physician whose audience was almost exclusively Gentile (not Jewish). Neither Matthew nor Luke used editorial fiction, but both selected events from Jesus's life (Christians say with inspiration from the Holy Spirit) that would be appropriate for their respective audiences. A Gentile audience would not have cared about the link to Abraham, but would have cared about Jesus's link to the first man, Adam. The idea of Jesus being connected with the very beginning of mankind had a certain appeal amongst the Greeks. For example, notice St. Paul's Epistle. The Epistles are written letters that make up a part of the New Testament. St. Paul's Epistle even went as far as to call Christ the "New Adam," saying that the original Adam caused man to die, but the New Adam offered all a reborn life. A Gentile audience would be more interested in Jesus's link to the dawn of humanity, whereas Jews would have wanted an authentic link to Abraham from Jesus.
One seeming contradiction between the two Gospels can be found in Jesus's Sermon on the Mount. Matthew mentions that immeditately prior to his sermon, Jesus "went up the mountain" (Matthew 5:1), but Luke says Jesus gave his sermon on "a stretch of level ground" (Luke 6:17). Both men quote the teachings from this sermon, now called the Beatitudes ("Blessed are the poor in spirit, Blessed are they who mourn, Blessed are the meek, etc.,).
So why the difference between mountain and plain? Any good preacher knows that a good sermon can be used more than once, especially when you're moving from town to town, as Jesus was. It would not be unreasonable to assume that Jesus preached the Beatitudes more than once, since no one in the next town would have heard the message addressed to the previous town.
Matthew mentions the Sermon on the Mount because his Jewish audience would have been keen on such a detail. Why? Moses was given the Law (the 10 Commandments) on Mount Sinai. Jesus was giving the law of blessedness while also standing on a mountain. Matthew also wrote Jesus's words that he "had not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it," (Matthew 5:17) which also appealed to the Jewish crowd. Moses gave Ten Commandments that came as Law from God, while Jesus said he would fulfill that Law. Luke, meanwhile, mentions that the sermon was given on a plain. Why this obscure detail? Luke was writing for a Gentile audience. The Gentiles were accumstomed to philosophy and debate in the Greek manner. Greek philosophers would debate each other on level ground: shoulder-to-shoulder and eye-to-eye, in order to give a sense of equality and fairness in their discussion. Since his Gentile audience would have more interest in a speech given in such a fashion, Luke retells one.
Even a slight difference can be detected in the wording of the Beatitudes in Luke's edition when contrasted with Matthew's. Luke added an additional "woe to you" after each "blessed are you" - something not found in Matthew's account. Again, if we take the perspective that these speeches were the same sermon given at different times, it is very possible that Jesus adapted his older sermon for a different audience. The Church maintains the discrepancy comes from changes Jesus made to his own speech, since neither sacred author would feel free to alter anything Jesus said.
Matthew opens his Gospel with a long genealogy of Jesus, starting with Abraham and ending with Joseph, Mary's husband and the human "father" of Jesus. Matthew was likely addressing converts from Judaism, linking Jesus back to the legendary founder of their religion.
Luke offers a similar genealogy, but not until Chapter 3, and he starts with Jesus and works all the way back to Adam. Luke was a Gentile physician whose audience was almost exclusively Gentile (not Jewish). Neither Matthew nor Luke used editorial fiction, but both selected events from Jesus's life (Christians say with inspiration from the Holy Spirit) that would be appropriate for their respective audiences. A Gentile audience would not have cared about the link to Abraham, but would have cared about Jesus's link to the first man, Adam. The idea of Jesus being connected with the very beginning of mankind had a certain appeal amongst the Greeks. For example, notice St. Paul's Epistle. The Epistles are written letters that make up a part of the New Testament. St. Paul's Epistle even went as far as to call Christ the "New Adam," saying that the original Adam caused man to die, but the New Adam offered all a reborn life. A Gentile audience would be more interested in Jesus's link to the dawn of humanity, whereas Jews would have wanted an authentic link to Abraham from Jesus.
One seeming contradiction between the two Gospels can be found in Jesus's Sermon on the Mount. Matthew mentions that immeditately prior to his sermon, Jesus "went up the mountain" (Matthew 5:1), but Luke says Jesus gave his sermon on "a stretch of level ground" (Luke 6:17). Both men quote the teachings from this sermon, now called the Beatitudes ("Blessed are the poor in spirit, Blessed are they who mourn, Blessed are the meek, etc.,).
So why the difference between mountain and plain? Any good preacher knows that a good sermon can be used more than once, especially when you're moving from town to town, as Jesus was. It would not be unreasonable to assume that Jesus preached the Beatitudes more than once, since no one in the next town would have heard the message addressed to the previous town.
Matthew mentions the Sermon on the Mount because his Jewish audience would have been keen on such a detail. Why? Moses was given the Law (the 10 Commandments) on Mount Sinai. Jesus was giving the law of blessedness while also standing on a mountain. Matthew also wrote Jesus's words that he "had not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it," (Matthew 5:17) which also appealed to the Jewish crowd. Moses gave Ten Commandments that came as Law from God, while Jesus said he would fulfill that Law. Luke, meanwhile, mentions that the sermon was given on a plain. Why this obscure detail? Luke was writing for a Gentile audience. The Gentiles were accumstomed to philosophy and debate in the Greek manner. Greek philosophers would debate each other on level ground: shoulder-to-shoulder and eye-to-eye, in order to give a sense of equality and fairness in their discussion. Since his Gentile audience would have more interest in a speech given in such a fashion, Luke retells one.
Even a slight difference can be detected in the wording of the Beatitudes in Luke's edition when contrasted with Matthew's. Luke added an additional "woe to you" after each "blessed are you" - something not found in Matthew's account. Again, if we take the perspective that these speeches were the same sermon given at different times, it is very possible that Jesus adapted his older sermon for a different audience. The Church maintains the discrepancy comes from changes Jesus made to his own speech, since neither sacred author would feel free to alter anything Jesus said.
History of the Gospel
Sts. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were not taking notes as Jesus preached and performed his ministry. As a matter of fact, only Matthew and John even met Jesus. In short, don't think of the Gospel as a biography reporting on Jesus's life. Before the Gospels were written, the words and deeds of Jesus were passed down orally. In other words, the Gospel was preached before it was written. The spoken word (tradition) again preceded the written word. Even after it was recorded, the papyrus scrolls were so fragile and rare that most people didn't read the Word, but learned it through Mass. The Church divides the Word into three layers: the actual sayings and teachings of Christ, the oral tradition the apostles preached, and the written Scripture that ensured the message would be consistent.
The New Testament was written between the years 35-100 A.D. The actual Tetramorph (the four Gospels put together) can be dated to at least 188 (when St. Irenaeus mentions it), but it wasn't until the Council of Carthage (397 A.D.) that the Church explicitly stated the 27 books of the New Testament, including the four Gospels. St. Jerome was the first to combine the New and Old Testament into one volume and to translate the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into one single language-Latin. It took him an incredible 23 years to complete this task, but the final product was the first Christian Bible in 405.
The New Testament was written between the years 35-100 A.D. The actual Tetramorph (the four Gospels put together) can be dated to at least 188 (when St. Irenaeus mentions it), but it wasn't until the Council of Carthage (397 A.D.) that the Church explicitly stated the 27 books of the New Testament, including the four Gospels. St. Jerome was the first to combine the New and Old Testament into one volume and to translate the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into one single language-Latin. It took him an incredible 23 years to complete this task, but the final product was the first Christian Bible in 405.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Catholic Beliefs on the Gospel
Even though each Gospel was written by a different man, the same Holy Spirit is believed to have inspired each man. Inspiration is a gift of the Holy Spirit granted to the sacred authors (the physical writers of the Bible) so they would only write the exact words that God wished to be recorded.
Both the Holy Spirit and the inspired author would write to a specific audience. This concept is clear in the Gospel According to Matthew. Matthew, a Jew himself, was addressing potential converts from Judaism and wished to assure them that Jesus was the promised Messiah of the Old Testament. To accomplish this, he made subtle comparisons between Christ and Moses. Matthew compared Jesus's deliverance of mankind from the slavery of sin to Moses's deliverance of the Chosen People from their slavery in Egypt. Both also delivered their people into a "Promised Land." In Moses's case, it was the nation of Israel, while in Christ's case, it was the Promised Land of Heaven.
Although each writer had a separate audience, each of the four Gospels still have relevance in today's world because the all four were inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Church believes that inspired texts have several meanings, transcend time and space, and (unlike most historical documents) do not apply to one particular culture at one particular time. This is why the Catholic Church goes to the trouble of incorporating all four Gospels at the Sunday Mass over a three-year period.
Interestingly enough, the Book of Revelation (written by an inspired John) contains an image of four creatures that the Church has interpreted to be a metaphor for the four Gospels. According to St. Ambrose (who lived late in the 4th Century), the man with wings symbolizes Matthew, since he begins his Gospel with an account of the human origins of Jesus. Mark begins his Gospel with the regal power of Christ, so he is symbolized by a lion- held in high esteem by his Roman audience. Luke begins his version with an account of the father of John the Baptist, Zachary the priest, and is symbolized as an ox with wings. This is because priests of the temple sacrificed oxen on an altar. Finally, John is shown as an eagle, because he soars into heaven with his introduction to the Gospel of the pre-existence of Jesus as the Word.
Both the Holy Spirit and the inspired author would write to a specific audience. This concept is clear in the Gospel According to Matthew. Matthew, a Jew himself, was addressing potential converts from Judaism and wished to assure them that Jesus was the promised Messiah of the Old Testament. To accomplish this, he made subtle comparisons between Christ and Moses. Matthew compared Jesus's deliverance of mankind from the slavery of sin to Moses's deliverance of the Chosen People from their slavery in Egypt. Both also delivered their people into a "Promised Land." In Moses's case, it was the nation of Israel, while in Christ's case, it was the Promised Land of Heaven.
Although each writer had a separate audience, each of the four Gospels still have relevance in today's world because the all four were inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Church believes that inspired texts have several meanings, transcend time and space, and (unlike most historical documents) do not apply to one particular culture at one particular time. This is why the Catholic Church goes to the trouble of incorporating all four Gospels at the Sunday Mass over a three-year period.
Interestingly enough, the Book of Revelation (written by an inspired John) contains an image of four creatures that the Church has interpreted to be a metaphor for the four Gospels. According to St. Ambrose (who lived late in the 4th Century), the man with wings symbolizes Matthew, since he begins his Gospel with an account of the human origins of Jesus. Mark begins his Gospel with the regal power of Christ, so he is symbolized by a lion- held in high esteem by his Roman audience. Luke begins his version with an account of the father of John the Baptist, Zachary the priest, and is symbolized as an ox with wings. This is because priests of the temple sacrificed oxen on an altar. Finally, John is shown as an eagle, because he soars into heaven with his introduction to the Gospel of the pre-existence of Jesus as the Word.
The Gospel Truth
The New Testament contains four Gospels which tell about the life and teachings of Jesus. The four evangelists (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) each wrote one of the four Gospels. It's important to note that the four aren't considered separate Gospels, but four versions of one Gospel. Hence they are called The Gospel According to Matthew or The Gospel According to Luke, and not Matthew's Gospel or Luke's Gospel. It's for this reason that the Church teaches the importance of considering the four Gospels as one entire unit. No one account gives the full picture, but together they form a complete (although not exhaustive) account of Jesus's ministry. The church faithful require all four versions in order to appreciate the full depth of Jesus of Nazareth and his impact. Catholicism respects each perspective from the four evangelists, but stresses that all four must be grouped together, along with other "inspired" Old Testament and New Testament writings, in order get a better portrait of Jesus.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Sunday Off-Topic: Satan's Jealousy
Every Introduction course always has its off-topic tangents, and Catholicism 101 is no different. On Sundays, we'll delve into some aspects of Catholicism that we might not otherwise get to. These areas are kind of up to my whim, but they will usually focus on unusual parts of Catholicism.
One Catholic belief is that angels were created before humans, and that their angelic will (unlike our own) is incapable of changing once a decision has been made. Angels have one irreversible act of will, and they know this. So when Lucifer (Satan) and his cohorts conspired to go against God's will, they sinned in a way that prevented them from ever seeking forgiveness, due to their very nature.
Humans, however, are quite capable of changing their minds - and this is how they can seek forgiveness and repentance. It's for this reason that Satan hates humans, because humans get a second chance that he never had. The fact that the Second Person of the Trinity had assumed the form of a man infuriated him still further, since God had never become an angel in any such manner.
One Catholic belief is that angels were created before humans, and that their angelic will (unlike our own) is incapable of changing once a decision has been made. Angels have one irreversible act of will, and they know this. So when Lucifer (Satan) and his cohorts conspired to go against God's will, they sinned in a way that prevented them from ever seeking forgiveness, due to their very nature.
Humans, however, are quite capable of changing their minds - and this is how they can seek forgiveness and repentance. It's for this reason that Satan hates humans, because humans get a second chance that he never had. The fact that the Second Person of the Trinity had assumed the form of a man infuriated him still further, since God had never become an angel in any such manner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)